Analyse, evaluate and compare the arguments in the extracts about
whether Britain needs a codified constitution. (25 marks)
23/25
A codified constitution is a set of rules, principles and guidance formally written
down in a singular document for a government to follow. In the UK we have a rare
uncodified one, however this has been a subject of debate for politicians and
scholars for many years. Extract 1 argues in favour of a British codified
constitution while examining how certain areas of concern in our society have
been exacerbated by the uncodified constitution. Extract 2 contradicts this by
looking out how our uncodified constitution enhances democratic freedoms and
argues that an uncodified constitution allows for flexibility and seamless
adaptation to social and political adversity. However, when going into this
analysis, it is important to note that extract 2 was written by a former
conservative MSP which means the writing could have been influenced by a
political leaning or bias. Despite this, both extracts are written by law professors
which displays credible expertise on the issue at hand meaning that the
information can most likely be trusted. Overall, I believe that Extract 1 arguing for
a codified constitution is more persuasive due to the need for better protected
human rights and the lack of clarity on devolution.
Firstly, extract 1 states that we have a Human Rights Act in place to protect and
uphold freedoms, however Douglas-Scott argues that rights would be better
protected within a codified constitution. The Human Rights Act was passed in
1998 and brought the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law as an
act of parliament with royal assent. The HRA is part of statue law but isn’t
entrenched, and as A.V. Dicey said, parliament can make any law that doesn’t
‘bind its successor’ meaning that the HRA is easily reversible. Extract 1 argues that
our rights would be better protected under a codified constitution compared to
how they are now at the mercy of parliament within an uncodified constitution. In
many places around the world there is evidence of a codified constitution linking
whether Britain needs a codified constitution. (25 marks)
23/25
A codified constitution is a set of rules, principles and guidance formally written
down in a singular document for a government to follow. In the UK we have a rare
uncodified one, however this has been a subject of debate for politicians and
scholars for many years. Extract 1 argues in favour of a British codified
constitution while examining how certain areas of concern in our society have
been exacerbated by the uncodified constitution. Extract 2 contradicts this by
looking out how our uncodified constitution enhances democratic freedoms and
argues that an uncodified constitution allows for flexibility and seamless
adaptation to social and political adversity. However, when going into this
analysis, it is important to note that extract 2 was written by a former
conservative MSP which means the writing could have been influenced by a
political leaning or bias. Despite this, both extracts are written by law professors
which displays credible expertise on the issue at hand meaning that the
information can most likely be trusted. Overall, I believe that Extract 1 arguing for
a codified constitution is more persuasive due to the need for better protected
human rights and the lack of clarity on devolution.
Firstly, extract 1 states that we have a Human Rights Act in place to protect and
uphold freedoms, however Douglas-Scott argues that rights would be better
protected within a codified constitution. The Human Rights Act was passed in
1998 and brought the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law as an
act of parliament with royal assent. The HRA is part of statue law but isn’t
entrenched, and as A.V. Dicey said, parliament can make any law that doesn’t
‘bind its successor’ meaning that the HRA is easily reversible. Extract 1 argues that
our rights would be better protected under a codified constitution compared to
how they are now at the mercy of parliament within an uncodified constitution. In
many places around the world there is evidence of a codified constitution linking
